What are the facts? Please keep an open mind and read the article first before casting your vote.

While there is certainly proof that mutations do occur in nature; There is absolutely no real evidence to support the theory of evolution at this time (for over the past 150 years of "Dino-digging"). Including the sedimentary column.

18

26%

There probably is evidence to support this theory, yet scientist are at a loss to explain it appropriately.

18

26%

Scientist are great at making shit up when they have no evidence to prove something that is false to begin with.

10

14%

I believe in Santa. He's a real person that lives all the way deep at the north pole and brings me presents every year. The presents prove that he's real. I also leave him milk and cookies to snack on and while I don't ever see him, I just know with all my heart, that he is the one who eats all the cookies and milk. Or, I wish I had a dogasaur like Dino.

AAFitz wrote:Well, I know of one woman who did an absolutely terrible job teaching.

And the point that the bible has many contradictions and cannot be taken literally has been the point we have been trying to make you see all along.

Its nice to see you agree there are contradictions now. Maybe that woman did a better job than I earlier suspected.

And speaking of contradictions, a truly narrow mind, would be incapable of reading into existence something that is not really there. That act would be labeled as a creative one, and while it may or may not result in a correct hypothesis, labeling it narrow, is just stupid, like everything else you've sprouted in here...no..its not stupid....this goes beyond stupid....

Its an obvious outright lie.

I would agree that there are only apparent contradictions. The truth is that contradiction or apparent contradictions are also a teaching tool that God uses in the Bible to make a point. An example of this would be Galatians 6:2 and 6:5. Two conflicting thoughts with one objective to get through to one. But if you read this out of context then you simply wont get it. Never!

As to the narrow mindedness; I wrote "Narrow mind lacking in understanding. Just to set the record straight. An excellent example of this is what happens to people who come forward with the truth and are Ostracized by the narrow minded scientific community lacking in wisdom and understanding, who can't face the truth that the theory of evolution has no foundation or proof of evidence to support it. It's all in the video.

Viceroy63 wrote:I would agree that there are only apparent contradictions. The truth is that contradiction or apparent contradictions are also a teaching tool that God uses in the Bible to make a point. An example of this would be Galatians 6:2 and 6:5. Two conflicting thoughts with one objective to get through to one. But if you read this out of context then you simply wont get it. Never!

How are we supposed to resolve these apparent contradictions by reading it? Because someone else told us what the resolution is?

This is the Hebrew of Genesis 1:1, the very beginning of the Bible. It is pronounced be-re-SHIYT ba-RA eh-lo-HIYM and is usually translated "In the beginning God created...."

The first word (reading right-to-left) is be-re-SHIYT. It is from the Hebrew root resh-aleph-shin, meaning "head, start, beginning," with the preposition bet on the front, meaning "in, on, at." So this word could be translated "in beginning" or "at start" or "at the head." The Hebrew name for the Jewish holiday Rosh HaShanah is from this same root, and means "head of the year" or "beginning of the year" -- Ha is the definite article "the" and Shanah is "year."

The second word is ba-RA, meaning create, shape or fashion. It is from the Hebrew word bet-resh-aleph.

The third word is eh-lo-HIYM, one of several names for God in the Hebrew Bible.

Translations are notoriously difficult when different languages fail to match precisely. This is evident in the very first verse of the Bible, where translators into English struggled to convey the meaning of the Hebrew text. On examining two English versions of the opening verses in Genesis, we find that categorizing a key word as an adverb rather than a noun resolves these difficulties.

In order to remedy the difficulties of both versions, let us recall a rule of Hebrew morphology: The prefix be- in front of an abstract noun converts it into an adverb.

You have not proved that, "IN THE BEGINNING..." is a mistranslation of the original Hebrew language. And those links that you provided also do not show how "IN THE BEGINNING..." is a mistranslation. The only thing that you showed is that the word, "re'shiyth" has multiple uses. One of those uses is First, another is Chief. But the best usage for the text is...

"IN THE BEGINNING..."

In the spirit of the language it implies a first and before the first there was nothing. After all, 54 King James Bible scholars were the ones who decided the best translation for "re'shiyth."

A beginning is thus the statement of the spirit of these words. A beginning that could not have been proven scientifically until about 40 or 50 years ago. Our modern times.

That makes the Holy Bible the most relevant, up to date and ahead of it's time, science book (that man knows of), in the Universe.

Viceroy, you may have missed it, but I already pointed out Hesiod. After several verses of praising the gods he gets down to business.

Verily at the first Chaos came to be, but next wide-bosomed Earth, the ever-sure foundations of all the deathless ones who hold the peaks of snowy Olympus, and dim Tartarus in the depth of the wide-pathed Earth, and Eros, fairest among the deathless gods, who unnerves the limbs and overcomes the mind and wise counsels of all gods and all men within them. From Chaos came forth Erebus and black Night; but of Night were born Aether and Day, whom she conceived and bare from union in love with Erebus. And Earth first bare starry Heaven, equal to herself, to cover her on every side, and to be an ever-sure abiding-place for the blessed gods. And she brought forth long Hills, graceful haunts of the goddess-Nymphs who dwell amongst the glens of the hills. She bare also the fruitless deep with his raging swell, Pontus, without sweet union of love. But afterwards she lay with Heaven and bare deep-swirling Oceanus, Coeus and Crius and Hyperion and Iapetus, Theia and Rhea, Themis and Mnemosyne and gold-crowned Phoebe and lovely Tethys. After them was born Cronos the wily, youngest and most terrible of her children, and he hated his lusty sire.

"Verily at first Chaos came to be"

That means there's a first point in time before which there's nothing, not even time.

So there you have it, a religious text other than bible or torah which implies the universe had a beginning. It's exactly what you asked for on page 17 of this thread. What are you going to do with it?

saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.

Viceroy63 wrote:"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."-2Timothy 4:3-4

Ah, the books of Timothy: my favourite. They're the ones that I use to keep all the women in line.

"Let a woman learn in silence with full submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach, or to exercise authority over a man, but to be in silence."-1 Timothy 2:11,12

Such sage advice. The Bible is truth, and such a statement must be obeyed; otherwise, off to hell we go.

This only proves the narrowness of your mind and intellect! That you can read something into existence that is not there. Read the whole context of the book and not just the verse if you wish to gain a better understanding of what is meant in 1Timothy 2:11-12.

For the record the Bible is full of women who taught and prophesied to all the people both men and women. For example...

"And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time."-Judges 4:4

To be a judge is to be a leader and an example of the people and for the people.

Although this is probably why you hold fast to the theory of evolution. Only a narrow mind, lacking in understanding, could read into existence something that is not really there.

Ah, so expand on the context, if you will. Until then, "let a woman learn in silence with full submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach, or to exercise authority over a man, but to be in silence."

I can just as easily say, This only proves the narrowness of your mind and intellect! That you can read something into existence that is not there. Read the whole context of the book and not just the verse if you wish to gain a better understanding of what is meant in Judges 4:4

Oh, hai Beebs! Ya think Viceroy is going to flesh out his argument, or will he keep it narrow?

AAFitz wrote:Well, I know of one woman who did an absolutely terrible job teaching.

And the point that the bible has many contradictions and cannot be taken literally has been the point we have been trying to make you see all along.

Its nice to see you agree there are contradictions now. Maybe that woman did a better job than I earlier suspected.

And speaking of contradictions, a truly narrow mind, would be incapable of reading into existence something that is not really there. That act would be labeled as a creative one, and while it may or may not result in a correct hypothesis, labeling it narrow, is just stupid, like everything else you've sprouted in here...no..its not stupid....this goes beyond stupid....

Its an obvious outright lie.

I would agree that there are only apparent contradictions. The truth is that contradiction or apparent contradictions are also a teaching tool that God uses in the Bible to make a point. An example of this would be Galatians 6:2 and 6:5. Two conflicting thoughts with one objective to get through to one. But if you read this out of context then you simply wont get it. Never!

As to the narrow mindedness; I wrote "Narrow mind lacking in understanding. Just to set the record straight. An excellent example of this is what happens to people who come forward with the truth and are Ostracized by the narrow minded scientific community lacking in wisdom and understanding, who can't face the truth that the theory of evolution has no foundation or proof of evidence to support it. It's all in the video.

You have the most narrow of minds, lacking in understanding.

Its all in your posts. Id suggest reading them, but seriously...I can't advocate that, as they have no foundation or proof of evidence of anything beyond the ability to waste time.

The only reason you "get it" is you fabricate context, and construct meaning, out of obvious contradiction....or in more useful terms, you are in denial. You have constructed a reality around yourself, and ignore all that proves it impossible or improbable with the most ridiculous of explanations to explain it.

Now while everyone must do this to some degree, you have done so with a mindset so narrow and a belief set so finely tuned, that honestly, its just insane. Further, in your denial, IE delusional state, you will see others calling you insane as justification that you must be right, confirming your delusional state of reality even further.

I, for my part, apologize for helping solidify your delusions, by constantly pointing the flaws in them. Obviously, this has only made the situation worse, and I regret any damage I have done to your sanity or emotional state.

AAFitz wrote:Well, I know of one woman who did an absolutely terrible job teaching.

And the point that the bible has many contradictions and cannot be taken literally has been the point we have been trying to make you see all along.

Its nice to see you agree there are contradictions now. Maybe that woman did a better job than I earlier suspected.

And speaking of contradictions, a truly narrow mind, would be incapable of reading into existence something that is not really there. That act would be labeled as a creative one, and while it may or may not result in a correct hypothesis, labeling it narrow, is just stupid, like everything else you've sprouted in here...no..its not stupid....this goes beyond stupid....

Its an obvious outright lie.

I would agree that there are only apparent contradictions. The truth is that contradiction or apparent contradictions are also a teaching tool that God uses in the Bible to make a point. An example of this would be Galatians 6:2 and 6:5. Two conflicting thoughts with one objective to get through to one. But if you read this out of context then you simply wont get it. Never!

As to the narrow mindedness; I wrote "Narrow mind lacking in understanding. Just to set the record straight. An excellent example of this is what happens to people who come forward with the truth and are Ostracized by the narrow minded scientific community lacking in wisdom and understanding, who can't face the truth that the theory of evolution has no foundation or proof of evidence to support it. It's all in the video.

You have the most narrow of minds, lacking in understanding.

Its all in your posts. Id suggest reading them, but seriously...I can't advocate that, as they have no foundation or proof of evidence of anything beyond the ability to waste time.

The only reason you "get it" is you fabricate context, and construct meaning, out of obvious contradiction....or in more useful terms, you are in denial. You have constructed a reality around yourself, and ignore all that proves it impossible or improbable with the most ridiculous of explanations to explain it.

Now while everyone must do this to some degree, you have done so with a mindset so narrow and a belief set so finely tuned, that honestly, its just insane. Further, in your denial, IE delusional state, you will see others calling you insane as justification that you must be right, confirming your delusional state of reality even further.

I, for my part, apologize for helping solidify your delusions, by constantly pointing the flaws in them. Obviously, this has only made the situation worse, and I regret any damage I have done to your sanity or emotional state.

lol, very good conclusion. I suggest that we all just let this thread die, the concept of discution is not possible with this person. Fanatism is a very sad thing. Enough waste of time. I think the funniest thing with fanatics is their sense of superiority.

I did learn about epigenetics though thanks to this thread and a few other things.

MeDeFe wrote:Viceroy, you may have missed it, but I already pointed out Hesiod. After several verses of praising the gods he gets down to business.

Verily at the first Chaos came to be, but next wide-bosomed Earth, the ever-sure foundations of all the deathless ones who hold the peaks of snowy Olympus, and dim Tartarus in the depth of the wide-pathed Earth, and Eros, fairest among the deathless gods, who unnerves the limbs and overcomes the mind and wise counsels of all gods and all men within them. From Chaos came forth Erebus and black Night; but of Night were born Aether and Day, whom she conceived and bare from union in love with Erebus. And Earth first bare starry Heaven, equal to herself, to cover her on every side, and to be an ever-sure abiding-place for the blessed gods. And she brought forth long Hills, graceful haunts of the goddess-Nymphs who dwell amongst the glens of the hills. She bare also the fruitless deep with his raging swell, Pontus, without sweet union of love. But afterwards she lay with Heaven and bare deep-swirling Oceanus, Coeus and Crius and Hyperion and Iapetus, Theia and Rhea, Themis and Mnemosyne and gold-crowned Phoebe and lovely Tethys. After them was born Cronos the wily, youngest and most terrible of her children, and he hated his lusty sire.

"Verily at first Chaos came to be"

That means there's a first point in time before which there's nothing, not even time.

So there you have it, a religious text other than bible or torah which implies the universe had a beginning. It's exactly what you asked for on page 17 of this thread. What are you going to do with it?

Yes; I must have missed this. Regardless of the fact I must apologize for not being more detailed in my request. Obviously any one can rewrite a Bible text and reword it. But the Bible is the only book of it's kind for the time to make such a claim. Do you not think that the writing of Moses or the stories of these Hebrew slaves that came out of Egypt were not looked into by surrounding nations. Or that the stories circulated far and wide. But none the less, no other originating pagan religion (from India or China or even Aztecs) claims that the Universe had a beginning. At least not before Moses put it down to writing on papyrus script.

Also when the Israelites were scattered, about the time just prior to Hesiod, some Israelites certainly would have ended up in Greece and beyond. So it is no surprise that we see the same Bible re-creation account of Genesis 1:2 repeated by Hesiod some 750 to 650 years before Christ. Exact dates on Hesiod are not available and could have been much later as well.

But if you show me that same claim on another 3,000 year old writ. from China or some other part of the world far away, (not some nearby nation that took everything that the Jews had including their Bible,) then this thread ends here. Guaranteed! At least I wont post any more new material here.

IT MUST BE THE SAME CLAIM AND NOT SOME APPROXIMATE FACSIMILE (more or less) THAT CAN BE MEANT TO IMPLY A BEGINNING AND A BEGINNER OF IT ALL.It must actually state a beginning or first. And no indication of anything prior at all.

BTW: I must say that Hesiod's god is a poor god because the first thing he makes is "Chaos?" The God of the Bible made the heaven and the earth perfect and then it became chaos because of the original sin in Heaven. Also there can be no chaos if not first for the order. You can have perfection and then imperfection but not the other way around. It just would not make sense. How would you know that something was in "Chaos" if you first did not see the order? That's like saying that something is dark before you ever saw the light. How would you know? The word Chaos itself indicates a prior "Order."

Last edited by Viceroy63 on Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Actually, there can be no order if not first for chaos. Just like you can have imperfection and then reach perfection through improvement. Nothing else makes sense, really. How would you know what order is if you have never seen chaos? That's like saying that something is light before you ever saw the darkness. How would you know? The word order itself indicates a prior chaotic state.

saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.

MeDeFe wrote:Actually, there can be no order if not first for chaos. Just like you can have imperfection and then reach perfection through improvement. Nothing else makes sense, really. How would you know what order is if you have never seen chaos? That's like saying that something is light before you ever saw the darkness. How would you know? The word order itself indicates a prior chaotic state.

How can that be so? If God was sitting on everything (including Himself cuz he's God), and if this brings order, then chaos need not be prior. The beginning of the universe was a new type of order--not from chaos, but from an orderly arrangement on which God was sitting.

MeDeFe wrote:Actually, there can be no order if not first for chaos. Just like you can have imperfection and then reach perfection through improvement. Nothing else makes sense, really. How would you know what order is if you have never seen chaos? That's like saying that something is light before you ever saw the darkness. How would you know? The word order itself indicates a prior chaotic state.

How can that be so? If God was sitting on everything (including Himself cuz he's God), and if this brings order, then chaos need not be prior. The beginning of the universe was a new type of order--not from chaos, but from an orderly arrangement on which God was sitting.

Stalin; You are missing the point. There was nothing for God to sit on in the first place. No universe, nothing. Only God existed. Time and Space and Matter were all created things. Things which He created and from nothing brought into existence, the universe. Even Science agrees to that.

So there was no Chaos or Order. God therefore being perfect creates all things perfect while the imperfect false gods which imperfect men create, create imperfectly. That is how "Chaos" is created first into existence from a false god.

That is also why the theory of evolution is a false and imperfect assumption, because it is created by fallible and imperfect beings like the false God that they create as well.

MeDeFe wrote:Actually, there can be no order if not first for chaos. Just like you can have imperfection and then reach perfection through improvement. Nothing else makes sense, really. How would you know what order is if you have never seen chaos? That's like saying that something is light before you ever saw the darkness. How would you know? The word order itself indicates a prior chaotic state.

How can that be so? If God was sitting on everything (including Himself cuz he's God), and if this brings order, then chaos need not be prior. The beginning of the universe was a new type of order--not from chaos, but from an orderly arrangement on which God was sitting.

Stalin; You are missing the point. There was nothing for God to sit on in the first place. No universe, nothing. Only God existed. Time and Space and Matter were all created things. Things which He created and from nothing brought into existence, the universe. Even Science agrees to that.

So there was no Chaos or Order. God therefore being perfect creates all things perfect while the imperfect false gods which imperfect men create, create imperfectly. That is how "Chaos" is created first into existence from a false god.

That is also why the theory of evolution is a false and imperfect assumption, because it is created by fallible and imperfect beings like the false God that they create as well.

Here we go again. Reference please, especially for the Science with a capital "S".

And remember what the poet said – “in booty there is loot, and in loot booty.” Or sump’n like that.

MeDeFe wrote:Actually, there can be no order if not first for chaos. Just like you can have imperfection and then reach perfection through improvement. Nothing else makes sense, really. How would you know what order is if you have never seen chaos? That's like saying that something is light before you ever saw the darkness. How would you know? The word order itself indicates a prior chaotic state.

How can that be so? If God was sitting on everything (including Himself cuz he's God), and if this brings order, then chaos need not be prior. The beginning of the universe was a new type of order--not from chaos, but from an orderly arrangement on which God was sitting.

Stalin; You are missing the point. There was nothing for God to sit on in the first place. No universe, nothing. Only God existed. Time and Space and Matter were all created things. Things which He created and from nothing brought into existence, the universe. Even Science agrees to that.

So there was no Chaos or Order. God therefore being perfect creates all things perfect while the imperfect false gods which imperfect men create, create imperfectly. That is how "Chaos" is created first into existence from a false god.

That is also why the theory of evolution is a false and imperfect assumption, because it is created by fallible and imperfect beings like the false God that they create as well.

Well first of all, Science does not agree there was nothing, and the range of possible theories about what existed before the big bang, is rather diverse. You are confusing the 'unknown' with 'nothing'.

Finally, evolution is absolutely imperfect at its current stage, and not all aspects are fully known. However, as a theory, it has monumental evidence that you simply choose to ignore, mostly because you choose not to ignore one of the many religious texts instead.

Your main problem with the theory of evolution is that it is not fully completed, and therefore you choose to assume it is faulty as such, and no doubt, aspects of the theory may turn out to be different than currently thought, but that simply means it is not perfect, but not totally off base as you suggest.

I must once again point out that your thought process, is perfectly aligned with a delusional construct, and as such, isn't really healthy. I realize that living with such a narrow viewpoint of understanding can seem safe, but in the end, its destructive, if not dangerous. Your passion and zeal to promote your beliefs, should really be the warning sign you need, that perhaps you need to step back and realize, the odds of you being completely correct, are infinitely impossible.

Last edited by AAFitz on Thu Jan 03, 2013 8:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.

MeDeFe wrote:Actually, there can be no order if not first for chaos. Just like you can have imperfection and then reach perfection through improvement. Nothing else makes sense, really. How would you know what order is if you have never seen chaos? That's like saying that something is light before you ever saw the darkness. How would you know? The word order itself indicates a prior chaotic state.

How can that be so? If God was sitting on everything (including Himself cuz he's God), and if this brings order, then chaos need not be prior. The beginning of the universe was a new type of order--not from chaos, but from an orderly arrangement on which God was sitting.

Stalin; You are missing the point. There was nothing for God to sit on in the first place. No universe, nothing. Only God existed. Time and Space and Matter were all created things. Things which He created and from nothing brought into existence, the universe. Even Science agrees to that.

So there was no Chaos or Order. God therefore being perfect creates all things perfect while the imperfect false gods which imperfect men create, create imperfectly. That is how "Chaos" is created first into existence from a false god.

That is also why the theory of evolution is a false and imperfect assumption, because it is created by fallible and imperfect beings like the false God that they create as well.

That's nice. You can address the following link until I take you seriously:

Viceroy63 wrote:After all, 54 King James Bible scholars were the ones who decided the best translation for "re'shiyth."

There has to be a joke somewhere in that. If your only defense is to fall back on a claim of the infallibility of one and only one group of biblical translators.

Ignoring the scholars of the actual religion that wrote those words and still use those words to this day.Ignoring the scholars of the "pillar and bulwark of the truth," the "one holy catholic and apostolic church."

I mean it's not like there are errors in the KJB translation. Perish the thought.

MeDeFe wrote:Actually, there can be no order if not first for chaos. Just like you can have imperfection and then reach perfection through improvement. Nothing else makes sense, really. How would you know what order is if you have never seen chaos? That's like saying that something is light before you ever saw the darkness. How would you know? The word order itself indicates a prior chaotic state.

How can that be so? If God was sitting on everything (including Himself cuz he's God), and if this brings order, then chaos need not be prior. The beginning of the universe was a new type of order--not from chaos, but from an orderly arrangement on which God was sitting.

Stalin; You are missing the point. There was nothing for God to sit on in the first place. No universe, nothing. Only God existed. Time and Space and Matter were all created things. Things which He created and from nothing brought into existence, the universe. Even Science agrees to that.

So there was no Chaos or Order. God therefore being perfect creates all things perfect while the imperfect false gods which imperfect men create, create imperfectly. That is how "Chaos" is created first into existence from a false god.

That is also why the theory of evolution is a false and imperfect assumption, because it is created by fallible and imperfect beings like the false God that they create as well.

Here we go again. Reference please, especially for the Science with a capital "S".

A response. viceroy? or your third la-la-la I can't hear you?

(I'm not counting anyone else's challenges at this point, or a number of others of mine which you honestly might have missed in the general flak that comes in your direction).

But your continual appeals to unimpeachable authority which you can't then back up are beginning to be tiresome.

And remember what the poet said – “in booty there is loot, and in loot booty.” Or sump’n like that.

jonesthecurl wrote:Here we go again. Reference please, especially for the Science with a capital "S".

A response. viceroy? or your third la-la-la I can't hear you?

(I'm not counting anyone else's challenges at this point, or a number of others of mine which you honestly might have missed in the general flak that comes in your direction).

But your continual appeals to unimpeachable authority which you can't then back up are beginning to be tiresome.

He, of course cannot.... the only things he will believe are things that already agree with his thought processes.

Convenient way to believe you know what truth is... just ignore anything that points out a difference. Of course, this is pretty much exactly the opposite of what Christ teaches (not that you particularly care about that argument, I realize).

Viceroy is not just wrong, he blasphemies by pretending his lies are supported by the Bible.